abbreviated resettlement action plan (arap)...20 august 2015 postnet e835 box 97, kabulonga lusaka,...

COUNTRY: ZAMBIA

PROJECT: SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND

ENTREPRENEURSHIP PROJECT

ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN

(ARAP)

FOR 27 HOUSEHOLDS (145 PEOPLE) TO BE DISPLACED FROM PROJECT SITE

IN MANSA, LUAPULA PROVINCE, ZAMBIA

Prepared for the Government of Zambia

Dr. Rosemary Fumpa Makano1 Consultant

20 AUGUST 2015

PostNet E835

Box 97, Kabulonga

Lusaka, Zambia

1 Contact: [email protected]

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GROUP

mailto:[email protected]

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry of Zambia, through the Citizens Economic Empowerment Commission (CEEC), intends to build

industrial clusters in seven Provinces2 across Zambia. This initiative, to be financed by the African Development Bank (AfDB), will be

implemented under the Skills Development and Entrepreneurship Project (SEDP),whose major goal is to create jobs, reduce poverty and enhance

the population’s livelihoods, especially for economically disadvantaged groups (mainly women and the youth). The project has two main

Components: 1. Development of Industrial Clusters, and 2. Up-scaling the cassava value chain. Under component 1, the Project will support

construction of the industrial clusters through public-private partnership (PPP) arrangements, while ensuring that gender is mainstreamed in all

aspects. The Industrial Clusters will (i) provide an enabling physical space to promote organized markets and creation of market linkages of the

products; (ii) foster access to appropriate technologies, innovation and pooled business development services to boost production, efficiency and

quality of products; (iii) improve access to quality business advisory services; and (iv) promote access to finance and linkages with financial

institutions. This subcomponent will benefit the urban poor who are operating as street artisan manufacturers, especially youth and women in

targeted provinces.

In component 2, the Project aims at developing the cassava agribusiness value chain, focusing on commercialization of cassava for industrial

products such as starch, glue, stock feed, etc. as well as food products. In Zambia, cassava is a second staple food crop after maize – hence the

need to unlock its full potential as a cash crop, while supporting women and youth along the value chain. The project aims to achieve the following:

(i) identify both internal and external markets and promote market linkages; (ii) organize the supply side of the cassava sector in order to improve

production and quality of cassava; (iii) improve access to technologies to enhance quality and efficiency in the subsector; (iv) enhance the

regulatory environment and provide incentives for the subsector; and (v) enhance business advisory services to MSMEs in the cassava sector.

CEEC has accessed land for construction of industrial clusters from Municipal Councils in five Provinces, one of which includes Luapula Province.

However, in Mansa (Luapula Province), the 10.8 ha land allocated to CEEC by Mansa Municipal Council (MMC) in the newly opened Luka

Kapasha Development Area is still occupied by 27 households from two villages, namely: Chimpulumba (20 households) and Chikuwe

(7households) who are expected to move out to pave way for construction of an industrial cluster on that site.

According to the Bank’s policies, Operation Social Safeguards number 2 on land acquisition, involuntary resettlement and displacement

compensation, it is a requirement that whenever a project supported by the Bank involves displacement of people less than 200 whose economic

activities may not significantly be impacted by displacement, an abbreviated resettlement action plan (ARAP) should be produced. And this

requirement is in harmony with the Zambian government’s statutes3 on resettlement of displaced people.

Based on this requirement, a consultant was engaged to assist the Government in developing an ARAP specifically for the 10.8 ha of land allocated

to the project to ensure that people who will be affected by the SEDP are consulted in order to safeguard their interests during and after their

involuntary resettlement. This ARAP builds upon previous public consultations, negotiations and final agreements reached between MMC, Chief

Kalasa Lukangaba and his representatives, political leaders in the province and local communities who live within the 3,150 ha of land that Chief

Kalasa Lukangaba allocated to MMC for extension of the Mansa township boundaries by a 10 km radius. It is within this area that CEEC has been

given 10.8 ha of land for the SEDP.

A noted earlier, this Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP) relates to the 10.8 ha of land allocated to CEEC, and covers twenty seven (27)

households, comprising of one hundred and forty five (145) people still living in that area who will be affected by the Skills Development and

Entrepreneurship Project (SDEP).

The report follows a standard outline provided by the Bank (AfDB, 2013)4 and forms the scope of the ARAP. The scope and level of detail

required in an ARAP includes:

1. Range of potential risks and impacts which the affected persons may be subjected to;

2. Results of the socio-economic survey in the form of a clear social baseline and relevant cut-off date/(s);

3. A description of consultation activities with the affected and host populations;

4. A description of compensation options, resettlement-assistance and livelihood-improvement options to be provided;

5. A description of the procedures for redress of grievances;

6. Institutional responsibilities for implementation, including involvement of NGOs in monitoring the ARAP; and

7. A schedule, budget and sources of funds, which should be agreed upon with the Executing Agency.

Following the above outline, consultative activities were carried out to collect data for the respective sections (i) to (vii) above. Some of the

information contained in this report was obtained from the MMC overall Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the 3,150 ha extension of the Mansa

Township.

MMC has offered four types of compensation to the 620 people who will be relocated from Luka Kapasha Development Area, namely:

2 These are Eastern, Copperbelt, Luapula, Lusaka, Northern, Northwestern and Western Provinces. 3 Some of these statutory provisions include: the Disaster Management Act (No. 13 of 2010); Lands Act Cap (184) of 1995; Lands Acquisition Act (Cap. 189)3 of 1996; Agricultural Lands Act (Cap. 187) (No. 13 of 1994); Local Government Act (Cap. 281) No. 30 of 1995; Town and Country Planning Act (Cap. 283) No. 29 of 1995 and their respective policies. 4 AfDB (2013), The African Development Bank’s Integrated Safeguard System - Policy Statement on Operational Safeguards, December 2013; AfDB(2012); The African

Development Bank’s Integrated Safeguard System_ Policy Statement and Operational Safeguards 26, September 2012. Quality Assurance and Results Department (ORQR)

ii

i) A free residential plot to each household in the low cost section of the Luka Kapasha development area as land for land compensation

where the each household will build a house as replacement to the one they live in now;

ii) Free architectural drawings from MMC to each household for the type and size of houses permitted to be constructed in the low

cost section of Luka Kapasha development area;

iii) Land for land compensation from His Royal Highness Chief Kalasa Lukangaba for agricultural fields and farmland to all PAPs;

iv) Monetary compensation from MMC for each house, and any immovable assets owned by respective PAPs such as water wells, fruit

trees, etc. as valued at the time of assessment in 2014. PAPs will be paid as soon as MMC receives funding from central government

for this activity.

Zambia has several pieces of legislation that support resettlement of people. Principal among these pieces of legislation are: the Disaster Management Act (No. 13 of 2010); Lands Act Cap (184) of 1995; Lands Acquisition Act (Cap. 189)5 of 1996; Agricultural Lands Act (Cap. 187) (No. 13 of 1994); Local Government Act (Cap. 281) No. 30 of 1995; Town and Country Planning Act (Cap. 283) No. 29 of 1995 and their respective policies. These legal frameworks have provisions for resettlement of people that may be displaced from their residential or non-residential areas due to external factors including those emanating from human activities (anthropogenic) or caused by acts of nature. For instance, people may be affected by a national development project such as expansion of road infrastructure, construction of airports, factories or housing schemes that lead to their physical displacement and involuntary resettlement. Alternatively, people may be affected by natural disasters such as floods or human induced infringements such as acts of war which causes them to relocate and be resettled as refugees or victims of war. Whatever the case, there are standard procedures provided in the legal frameworks for relocation of people. For the 27 households (145 people) from Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages who are still on the land designated for the Project, this assessment found that 2 households have moved out to a new area in Chief Matanda’s chiefdom as per compensation provision specified under iii) above. The 25 households still on site fear that if they move out, MMC will take it easy and will not be in a

hurry to compensate them. Hence, they have decided to wait to be compensated in full before they can move out. In terms of institutional responsibilities and monitoring relocation of PAPs from the project site, this ARAP recommends the following (Table 1): Table 1: Institutional Responsibilities

ACTIVITY LEAD INSTITUTION SUPPORTING INSTITUTION(S)

1 ARAP implementation Mansa Municipal Council (MMC) Ministry of Commerce, CEEC

2 Compensation of PAPs MMC Central government

3 Fund Manager to handle payment of compensation packages for PAPs

National Savings and Credit Bank (NATSAVE) CEEC, MMC

4 Priority/special treatment to identified vulnerable people (elderly, women and youths) MMC

Disaster Management & Mitigation Unit (DMMU); Civil Society for Poverty Reduction (CSPR), and other NGOs in the area.

5 Find alternative land to resettle PAPs MMC Chief Kalasa Lukangaba; Chief Matanda; Ministry of Agriculture; Department of Resettlement; DMMU

6 Support to PAPs for income generating activities (e.g. trading space; loans, etc.) MMC, CEEC Ministry of Agriculture; Department of Resettlement; DMMU

7 Monitor effective implementation of the ARAP Zambia Land Alliance, Caritas Zambia Chiefs and their Headmen/women; CSPR

The cost of compensating 27 households is estimated to be ZMW 4,119,810 (USD 516,459). Furthermore, this ARAP provides a

roadmap for the grievance mechanism which PAPs should use to get their issues resolved. It proposes having Zambia Land Alliance,

a Non-Governmental Organization with keen interest in equitable distribution of land as well as an advocate for women and youths

empowerment programs in Zambia, to help oversee implementation of the ARAP.

Considering that only three months are remaining in 2015 before rain season starts in December, it is recommended that government secures funds to fully compensate PAPs now so that they could move out of the project site before onset of rains. It will be quite inhuman to expect people to move during the rainy season. Compensating PAPs now would help them cultivate their staple food in the new areas and avert food insecurity next year. Taking into account this time constraint, the following ARAP implementation schedule is proposed (Table 2).

Table 2: Proposed ARAP Implementation Schedule

No. ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTIVITIES DATES / TIMEFRAME

1 Disclosure of ARAP for review and comment (30 days prior to Board presentation) 30 August, 2015

2 Finalize the ARAP in light of comments received 30 September, 2015

3 Adoption of the ARAP by Mansa Municipal Council 15 October, 2015

4 Commence ARAP implementation 30 October, 2015

5 MMC allocates residential plots to PAPs for construction of their home replacement (already provided for in the MMC RAP, 2015) Process to commence soon

6 Allocation of agricultural land for land compensation to PAPs by His Royal Highness Chief Kalasa Lukangaba (see MMC RAP, 2015) Process to commence soon

7 Signing and execution of agreements with individual households, including delivery of all cash and in-kind compensation entitlements 30 October, 2015

8 All PAPs move out of CEEC land (phased approach) 30 November, 2015

5 As Amended by Statutory Instrument No. 65 of 1996.

iii

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. i

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ iii

List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................iv

Definition of Terms Used in this ARAP .......................................................................................................................................................................................... v

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1. Project site ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Number of Project Affected Persons ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.3. Scope of the Abbreviated Resettlement Plan .................................................................................................................................................................... 1

2. BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.1. Principles ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.2. Legal /Policy Context ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

3. DETAILS OF THE ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN .......................................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Potential Risks and Impacts ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 3

3.2 Results of the Socio-economic Survey in Chikuwe and Chimpulumba Villages .............................................................................................................. 3

3.3 Consultation with the Affected and Host Populations; .................................................................................................................................................... 3

3.4 Compensation Options, Resettlement-assistance and Livelihood-improvement Options to be provided ........................................................................ 3

3.5 Procedures for Redressing of Grievances ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.6 Institutional Responsibilities for Implementing the ARAP, including involvement of NGOs in monitoring the ARAP ................................................... 5

3.7 Schedule ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.8 Budget Estimate for ARAP ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

4. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 8

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 9

APPENDIX A: RESIDENTS AND SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION FOR 27 HOUSEHOLDS FROM CHIKUWE AND CHIMPULUMBA

VILLAGES IN LUKA KAPASHA DEVELOPMENT AREA, MANSA, LUAPULA PROVINCE ....................................................................................... 10

Tables

Table 1: Institutional Responsibilities .............................................................................................................................................................................................. ii

Table 2: Proposed ARAP Implementation Schedule ........................................................................................................................................................................ ii

Table 3: Potential Risks and Impacts ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 3

Table 4: Results of Socio-economic Survey & Cut-off Date(s) ....................................................................................................................................................... 3

Table 5: Public Consultations with PAPs and Host Communities ................................................................................................................................................. 4

Table 6: Compensation Options ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Table 7: Resettlement Assistance and Livelihood Improvement Options ....................................................................................................................................... 5

Table 8: Timeframe and Schedule of Activities for the Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan ..................................................................................................... 5

Table 9: ARAP Budget Estimate ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

iv

List of Acronyms

AfDB African Development Bank

ARAP Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan

CBD Central Business District

CEEC Citizens Economic Empowerment Commission

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

FISP Fertilizer Input Support Programme

FPIC Free and Prior Informed Consent

FRAP Full Resettlement Action Plan

GRZ Government of the Republic of Zambia

HH Households

HIV/AIDS Human Immune Virus / Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

IRP Involuntary Resettlement plan

ISS Integrated Safeguards Systems

MMC Mansa Municipal Council

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

OVC Orphans and Vulnerable Children

PAP Project Affected Persons

RAP Resettlement Action Plan

SEDP-WYS Skills and Entrepreneurship Development Project – Women & Youth Services

TBA To be Advised

ZLA Zambia Land Alliance

ZMK Zambian Kwacha (unrebased currency, before 2013)

ZMW Zambian Kwacha (rebased currency, after 2013)

v

Definition of Terms Used in this ARAP

TERM MEANING

Compensation: Payment in cash and / or in kind for an asset or resource affected by the Project.

Economic displacement: Loss of definable income streams or means of livelihood resulting from Project-related land acquisition in the Project

Footprint and/or obstructed access to the resources (land, water, or forest) located therein for which a recognized right of

access exists.

Entitlement: The compensation, rights and assistance measures offered by this Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan.

Entitlement cut-off Date: Date disclosed and legally certified as the deadline for entitlement eligibility (in the case of the Luka Kapasha Development

Area, the date in 2015 upon which the survey teams administered the asset inventory for the relevant household). Up to and

including that date, immoveable assets in the Project Footprint are eligible for entitlement compensation. Immoveable assets

established in the Project Footprint after that date, are not eligible for entitlement compensation.

Household: A group of persons living together, who share the same cooking and eating facilities, otherwise pool their resources, and form

a basic socio-economic and decision making unit.

International Best

Practice:

Performance Standards on Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement as outlined in the African Development Bank

(AfDB) ISS Guidelines.

Involuntary Resettlement: Resettlement is involuntary when it occurs without the informed consent of the displaced persons or if they give their consent

without having the power to refuse resettlement.

Livelihoods restoration: Programs that will provide Project Affected Households with a viable opportunity to restore their livelihoods to pre-Project

levels.

Non-resident households: Those households with ownership rights to assets other than primary residential structures located in the Project Footprint as

of the entitlement cut-off date. These households will be economically displaced.

Non-residential structure: An unfinished, incomplete house or set of structures that cannot be used as an independent, inhabitable residence.

Physical displacement: A loss of primary residential structures and related non-residential structures and physical assets because such structures /

assets are located in the Project Footprint.

Project affected

household:

A household made up of one or more Project Affected Persons.

Project affected person: Any person who, as a result of the Project, loses an existing recognized right to own, use, or otherwise benefit from a built

structure, land (residential, agricultural, or pasture),annual or perennial crops and trees, or any other fixed or moveable asset,

either in full or in part, permanently or temporarily.

Project Footprint: As currently defined, an area of approximately 3,150 hectares, namely Luka Kapasha on both sides of Chembe -Mansa Road,

3 kilo meters from Mansa Central Business District.

Replacement cost: The amount of cash compensation sufficient to replace assets or resources affected by the Project according to market rates

and covers transaction costs, without taking into account depreciation or salvage value.

Resettlement: A compensation process through which physically displaced households are provided with replacement plots and residential

structures at a resettlement community in the Department of Development Planning 2015

Abbreviated Resettlement

Action Plan (ARAP):

A public document which specifies the procedures and actions to be undertaken to mitigate adverse effects, compensate

losses, and provide development benefits to project affected households. ARAP is recommended for less than 200 PAPs.

Resettlement Action Plan

(RAP):

A public document which specifies the procedures and actions to be undertaken to mitigate adverse effects, compensate

losses, and provide development benefits to project affected households. Full RAP applies in cases which involves more than

200 PAPs.

Resident households: Those households with ownership rights to primary residential structures in the Project Footprint as of the entitlement cut-off

date. These households will be physically displaced.

Stakeholders: Persons or groups who are affected by or can affect the outcome of the Project. Stakeholders may be individuals, interest

groups, government agencies, or corporate organizations.

Vulnerable: Project Affected People who, by virtue of gender, ethnicity, age, physical or mental disability, economic disadvantage, or

social status, may be more adversely affected by resettlement than others and who may be Limited in their ability to claim or

take advantage of resettlement assistance and related development benefits.

1

1. INTRODUCTION

Mansa Municipal Council (MMC) has allocated 10.8 ha of land to the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry through the Citizens Economic

Empowerment Commission (CEEC) in the new area of Mansa town called Luka Kapasha Development Area, south of Mansa district; 3km from

Mansa Central Business District (CBD) along Mansa-Chembe road. The land given to the CEEC is for the development of industrial clusters under

the Skills Development and Entrepreneurship Project (SDEP), which is supported by the African Development Bank (AfDB). However, this

Project land still has 27households (comprising 145 people) still living onsite, but are required to move as earlier agreed upon between MMC, His

Royal Highest Chief Kalasa Lukangaba (who donated the 3,150 ha for extension of MMC township boundaries), local political leaders and the

local communities that had settled in the area. This development will result in the physical involuntary relocation of the 27 households from the

land designated for the Project.

According to the Social Safeguard Policy OSS2 of the African Development Bank (AfDB), when a Bank supported project leads to displacement

of less than 200 people (AfDB, 2013), an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP)must be formulated to take care of the interests of the

project affect persons (PAPs). To this effect, a consultant was engaged to assist the Government in developing an ARAP specifically for the 10.8

ha land allocated to the Project in Mansa (Luapula Province) to ensure that people who will be affected by the SDEP are consulted in order to

safeguard their interests during and after their involuntary resettlement.

This ARAP has been developed based on consultations with the project affected people, MMC as well as other key stakeholders with interest in

equitable land distribution, sustainable development and advocates for women and youths empowerment programs in Zambia. According to MMC

RAP (2015:p1), five (5) villages6 will be affected by the development of the new town in Luka Kapasha area. However, the Project is particularly

interested in the people found in Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages (refer to Appendix A) who are currently on the land allocated to the project,

and will be subsequently affected by the Project.

A physical count of the people in Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages7on 6-7 August 2015 revealed that there are 27 households, comprising of

145 people – which on average translates to 5 people per household. This population meets the Bank’s guiding criterion on developing an ARAP.

According to AfDB (2012) safeguard policy guidelines8,“for any project in which the number of people to be displaced is “small” (fewer than 200

people) and land acquisition and potential displacement and disruption of livelihoods are deemed less significant, an Abbreviated Resettlement

Action Plan (ARAP) shall be prepared and agreed upon with the borrower or client.” To this effect, this ARAP has been developed in line with

the Bank’s safeguard policy guidelines and presented together with the Environmental Social Management Plan (ESMP).

1.1. Project site

Out of 27 households still on the project land, three residents are reluctant to move to alternative land offered by MMC as part of the compensation

package of land for land, in addition to the cash payment for their assets. These three residents expressed displeasure over the compensation

packaged offered by MMC and consider any previous discussions with MMC regarding their compensation as inconclusive. But MMC maintains

that this matter has already been settled and most people are ready to move as evidence by the fact that initial exercise conducted by MMC there

were 85 household. Almost a year later 27 households are still awaiting MMC to compensate them before they move. However, three out of 27

households have shown resistance to move. CEEC should engage MMC and these three households to resolve the outstanding issues in a timely

manner.

1.2. Number of Project Affected Persons

As noted above, there are 27 households (about 145people) still on Project land that have to be resettled in a new land area. His Royal Highness,

Chief Kalasa Lukangaba has offered to host the PAPs in his chiefdom. In other words, these 27 households from Chikuwe and Chimpulumba

villages together with people from the other three villages (Chalowa, Chipeleme and Chushi Kaole) (see MMC RAP, 2015) will all be absorbed

within Chief Kalasa Lukangaba’s chiefdom. During the public consultations to collect data for this ARAP, it was found that some people have

already moved and settled in Chief Matanda’s Chiefdom, west of Mansa town. It is important to note that all PAPs are Ushi people; they originate

from the same kingdom. Therefore, there will be minimal cultural shock (if any) for integration of PAPs into surrounding villages or the new area

which His Royal Highest Chief Kalasa Lukangaba has designated to resettle these people in.

While the full RAP prepared by MMC covers 166 households (620 project affected people) from five villages, the Project is only interested in the

movement of people currently on the land allocated to it, to ensure that they do not delay the starting dates. In addition, the CEEC is desirous to

see that each household receives fair compensation in line with Zambian laws and the Bank’s ISS Operational Safeguard No: 2 on Involuntary

Resettlement: Land acquisition, population displacement and compensation. According to these policy guidelines, these PAPs should not be worse

off than they were before being moved to the new settlement areas.

1.3. Scope of the Abbreviated Resettlement Plan

The scope and level of detail in this ARAP includes:-

i. Range of potential risks and impacts which the affected persons may be subjected to;

ii. Results of the socio-economic survey in the form of a clear social baseline and relevant cut-off date/(s);

iii. A description of consultation activities with the affected and host populations;

iv. A description of compensation options, resettlement-assistance and livelihood-improvement options to be provided;

v. A description of the procedures for redress of grievances;

vi. Institutional responsibilities for implementation, including involvement of NGOs in monitoring the ARAP; and

vii. A schedule, budget and sources of funds, which should be agreed upon with the executing agency.

6 These villages are: Chalowa, Chikuwe, Chimpulumba, Chipeleme and Chushi Kaole. 7 The Consultant acknowledges, with thanks, the presence of CEEC Provincial Coordinator in Mansa, Mr Juvensio Phiri, and Mr Moses Mutuna from Mansa Municipal Council who were onsite to do the physical counting. 8 AfDB, 2012,African Development Bank’s Integrated Safeguard System Policy Statement and Operational Safeguards 26 September 2012. Quality Assurance And Results Department

2

2. BACKGROUND

Luka Kapasha area is located 3 kilometers south of Mansa Central Business District on the Mansa–Chembe road. The area stretches from the

Zambia National Broadcasting Service station to Muwang’uni stream, covering a total area of 3,150 hectares of land. This area has 166 resident

households amounting to 620 full time residents. Mansa Municipal Council has given 10.8 ha out of 3,150 hectares of land to the SEDP on which

27 households (145 full time people) still reside in the area; of which 85 are adults and 60 are children. In order to facilitate commencement of the

project, there is need to resettle these people elsewhere as soon as possible; which means these residents will be physically displaced with their

economic assets. This ARAP document pertains exclusively to the displacement and compensation of the 27households for their assets and

economic activities they may have been engaged in.

1.1. Principles

In developing this ARAP, the following principles based on AfDB’s Operational Social Safeguards have been applied.

i) Transparency: ensure that affected people are consulted and give their demonstrable acceptance to the ARAP;

ii) Displacement is done in the context of negotiated settlements with project affected people;

iii) Implement a resettlement process based on the Bank’s;

iv) Maintain standards of the Bank’s Integrated Safeguards System (ISS) on Involuntary Resettlements;

v) Adherence to world’s best practices regarding disclosure of information to the PAPs in line with free-prior- informed Consent (FPIC);

vi) Process should be driven by consultation and participatory planning;

vii) Compensate with replacement value and restore livelihoods, with minimum disturbance;

viii) Design compensation framework, replacement assets and livelihoods restoration to ensure sustainable benefits; and

ix) Provide modern replacement assets and enable community continuity in a way that they are not worse off than they were before

relocation.

1.2. Legal /Policy Context

Zambia has several pieces of legislation that support resettlement of people. Principal among these pieces of legislation are: the Disaster

Management Act (No. 13 of 2010); Lands Act Cap (184) of 1995; Lands Acquisition Act (Cap. 189)9of 1996;Agricultural Lands Act (Cap. 187)

(No. 13 of 1994); Resettlement Act; Local Government Act (Cap. 281) No. 30 of 1995; Town and Country Planning Act (Cap. 283) No. 29 of

1995 and their respective policies. These legal frameworks have provisions for resettlement of people that may be displaced from their residential

or non-residential areas due to external factors including those emanating from human activities (anthropogenic) or caused by acts of nature. For

instance, people may be affected by a national development project such as expansion of road infrastructure, construction of airports, factories or

housing schemes that lead to their physical displacement and involuntary resettlement. Alternatively, people may be affected by natural disasters

such as floods or human induced infringements such as acts of war which causes them to relocate and be resettled as refugees or victims of war.

Whatever the case, there are standard procedures provided in the legal frameworks for relocation of people.

For instance, prior to resettling people affected by projects or disasters, alternative land is identified accompanied by conducting environmental

and social impact assessments (ESIAs) to determine potential adverse impacts and selection of suitable mitigation measures. In Zambia, ESIAs

are covered under the Environmental Management Act of 2012 and the National Environmental Policy of 2007.Because displaced people would

suffer both physical displacement and economic disruptions there is need to be compensated for loss of assets and streams of income that came

from their economic activities. Government valuations department is empowered to carry out property valuations to provide guidance on economic

compensation to cover losses in assets and economic activities.

In cases where relocation involves very big national development projects on land already occupied by individuals, the President is empowered

under the Lands Acquisition Act of 1996to acquire any piece of land in the national interest. During acquisition of such land, valuation of all

immovable assets and economic activities from which the occupier may be alienated from and hence suffer loss of access or ownership need to be

valued and appropriate compensation paid to occupier in full. The Compulsory Lands Acquisition Act as well as the Lands Act (Cap 184) of 1995

have sufficient provisions for compensating individuals. Compensation options include giving land for land, and cash payments for immovable

assets. Additionally, the Agriculture Resettlement Policy, (section 2.9.5) gives guidelines on how to resettle people in agricultural production

schemes.

The Bank’s resettlement policies are informed by the Integrated Safeguards System (ISS), Operational Safeguard2: Involuntary Resettlement,

Land acquisition, population displacement and compensation. This safeguard consolidates the policy statements and requirements set out in the

Bank’s policy on involuntary resettlement and incorporates a number of refinements to improve the operation effectiveness of those requirements

(AfDB, 2013). Furthermore, the Bank has elaborated steps that borrowers should adhere to once faced with an issue of involuntary resettlement

of people as a result of implementing a project. In a case where less than 200 people are affected by a project and these people have to be physically

relocated, the Bank requires a borrower to develop an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP). Where more than 200 PAPs are affected, a

Full Resettlement Action Plan is recommended (Op.cit).

With the fore-going legal/policy context in mind, the Project will only affect 27 households with an estimated 145 PAPs hence requiring the

Government to develop an ARAP. It is appreciated that MMC already developed a full Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the entire Luka

Kapasha development area. But the RAP falls short of the Bank’s standards, besides the fact that it also covers an area that is outside the Bank

supported project site.

9 As Amended by Statutory Instrument No. 65 of 1996.

3

3. DETAILS OF THE ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN

3.1 Potential Risks and Impacts

Potential risks and impacts likely to affect the 27 households are shown in Table 3below. They are mainly contingent on the social and economic

aspects of the PAP who will suffer physical relocation to new areas and economic disruption from their resources.

Table 3: Potential Risks and Impacts

3.2 Results of the Socio-economic Survey in Chikuwe and Chimpulumba Villages

The survey results (Table 4) presented in this section of the ARAP are part of the socio-economic survey carried out by the MMC in 2014 for the

entire Luka Kapasha development area (3,150 ha). However, a rapid socio-economic survey conducted by the Consultant hired by CEEC in 2015

only collected data from Chimpulumba and Chikuwe villages; the two villages located on the Project land. Although the total number of households

counted by MMC in 2014 is 85, only 27 households are still on the Project site; the other 58 households are outside the Project land, majority of

whom are on the other side of the highway. And out of the 27 households, 2houses are vacant as the residents have already moved to His Royal

Highness Chief Matanda’s area on the western side of Mansa town. Chief Matanda’s chiefdom shares boundaries with Chief Kalasa Lukangaba’s

chiefdom.

Table 4: Results of Socio-economic Survey & Cut-off Date(s)

Socio-economic survey results Relevant cut-off Date(s)

PAPs were engaged in small scale business activities listed below:

1. Peasant farming

2. Selling fish mongering

3. Keeping small livestock

4. Peddling in various merchandise

5. Annual Household incomes of less than ZMW 6,800

Socio-aspects

1. Average of 5 people / family

2. Sex distribution; 60% females and 40% males

3. 93% of PAPs had school going children, including some attending college and

Universities

4. Very low literacy levels, especially among women and elderly men

Literacy levels:15% of the population is able to read and write.

Assets

1. Mud houses with grass thatch

2. Mud house with iron roofing sheets

3. Brick houses with iron sheets

4. Brick houses with grass thatch

5. Water well/boreholes

6. Bicycle(s)

7. Motor cycle/Motor vehicle

8. Fruit trees

9. Gardens/fields

10. Agro assets: goats, poultry (chickens, ducks, pigeons, etc.)

Proposed Project start: January 2016

Cut–off date: by 20th October 2015 (TBA)

This date will allow Project Affected People (the 145 people) to

move to new site(s) before the rainy season starts (end of

November) and cultivate new fields there. Otherwise, they will

suffer from lack of food and possibly environmental risks if they

do not build their houses before the rainy season.

3.3 Consultation with the Affected and Host Populations;

Consultations with PAPs and host communities were carried out (Table 5 below) mainly to establish impacts and risks that PAPs may face due to

relocation, and also to check how host communities to the PAPs would react since PAPs would place pressure on existing land, public infrastructure

and other resources. This exercise was necessary in order to establish feelings of host communities and what conflict resolution strategies would

be put in place to reduce conflicts or indeed prevent them.

3.4 Compensation Options, Resettlement-assistance and Livelihood-improvement Options to be provided

Discussions with MMC and available correspondence regarding compensation to PAPs revealed that PAPs will be given compensation as follows:






Potential RISKS for Project Affected People (PAP) Potential IMPACTS for PAP in the New Place of Relocation

(1) Relocated people run the risk of suffering social acceptability in their new areas. They

may be rejected by host communities.

(2) Loss of assets such as houses, farm land, small livestock, poultry/rearing houses.

(3) Loss of harvest due to theft, inadequate means to transport produce and lack of

proper storage facilities in the new areas of relocation.

(4) Risk of PAPs contracting disease from host populations.

(5) Risk of PAPs infecting residents in host communities.

(6) Inadequate compensation as a result of inadequate funding to MMC.

(7) Inequitable relocation where vulnerable individuals may lose out.

(8) Becoming destitute in the new place due to loss of social networks and economic

resources.

(1) Temporal poverty; disrupted social networks and new ones not [easily]

developed.

(2) Low social status; not recognized / accepted in the new area.

(3) Poor household food security.

(4) Increase in school drop-out rate by school going children.

(5) Delayed education, pressure on public resources, clinics, schools in the new

areas.

(6) Social frictions over agro-fields, grazing grounds, water resources, etc.

(7) Low self- esteem and integrity.

(8) Failure to participate in social and political affairs.

(9) Cultural shock.

(10) Possible increase in disease morbidity and mortality.

4



for this activity.

Table 5: Public Consultations with PAPs and Host Communities

Consultation Activities with Affected & Host Populations

1. Meeting with MMC (planning office) and CEEC Provincial Coordinator

2. Develop questionnaire for data collection

3. Conduct rapid socio-economic survey in Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages (counted 27 households)

a. Interviews with heads of 27 households

b. Inventory of assets (used data already captured by MMC)

c. Extract and compile data for Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages

d. Data Analysis

4. Review correspondence from His Royal Highness Chief Kalasa Lukangaba for land to land compensation

5. Meet host communities where PAP will be resettled (nearby villages)

a. Host community’s views on receiving PAP

b. Assess land reserved for PAP resettlement (from MMC maps)

c. Assess social infrastructures for children, women and youths in host communities (from secondary data)

6. Discussions with the Department of Resettlement, Mansa

7. Meeting with Department of Agriculture, Mansa

This assessment revealed that some of the residents of Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages have moved out to new areas as per compensation

provision specified under iii) above. Those who have remained indicated that they fear that if they move, MMC will take it easy and will

not be in a hurry to compensate them. Hence, they will wait to be compensated in full before they can move out.

Considering that people are ready to move, and many of them have even molded and burnt the bricks in readiness for their relocation, it is the

Consultant’s view that MMC should immediately allocate each PAP a plot and give them architectural drawings as specified in the compensation

offers indicated in i) and ii) above. People can start building their houses using their own resources while waiting for MMC to compensate them

later, whenever funds will be made available. This approach will assure PAPs that MMC is ready and willing to compensate them as agreed. But

more importantly allocating each project affected household their residential plot now will also give each household a bit of time to construct their

houses rather than moving them out without allowing them ample time to build replacement homes. This is particularly true for the 25 households

who have not moved out. Since the designated residential plots in Luka Kapasha area just a kilometer away from their current homes, it will be

very easy for them to work on those plots now. Some could even complete building their houses before receiving their compensation from MMC,

which will make them be in a better situation than they are in now.

It is advisable that CEEC engages MMC to seek funding and pay these people as soon as possible. Otherwise, MMC’s inability to compensate the

PAPs will delay project starting time in Mansa. In order to improve people’s livelihoods beyond that of their former abodes, it is advisable that

financial support be given to income generating activities such as MSMEs that PAP were engaged in as shown in Table 4. PAPs should be

supported to continue with those income generating activities, and even to increase investments in the enterprises of their choice.

The preferred compensation option by the Bank is land-for-land rather than cash transfer that has higher propensity to leave recipients of such cash

compensation in a worse state than they were in after squandering the money. All assets owned by the PAPs were assessed in 2014 and an economic

value applied as advised by the government Valuations Department (see Annex A to this ARAP).

Although discussions regarding compensation package were concluded and an agreement reached between the relevant authorities and people

affected, it is the Consultant’s view that there is still room for additional options which could have been considered. Table 6below shows some of

the compensation options that PAP offered during discussions, in view of the project foot print in their lives.

Table 6: Compensation Options

Compensation options

1. Cash compensation for immoveable assets and land for land compensation (as per current agreement)

2. Material support to build new houses in a designated area, and land for land compensation (as per current agreement)

3. Build houses for displaced people, cash compensation for immovable assets, and land for land compensation

4. Full cash compensation at market prices (for all assets, including their land)

Furthermore, while land for land compensation has been received warmly, some people were skeptical that they have no control over the process

of where and when they are supposed to move to. As a result, families are slowly becoming food insecure and getting deeper into poverty as they

cannot cultivate their former fields since they are not allowed to do so. MMC is keeping them in this indeterminate state; there is no communication

as to when PAP will be paid to facilitate their movement. To this effect, Government should seriously consider offering resettlement assistance

for at least 2 years to help PAPs find their feet in the new resettlement areas. Table 7 indicates some of the resettlement assistance options that

could be considered to help resettle the PAPs with minimal discomfort.

5

Table 7: Resettlement Assistance and Livelihood Improvement Options

Resettlement Assistance & Livelihood Improvement Options Collaborating Institutions

1 Construct houses for senior citizens who don’t have the energy anymore to build new houses. Disaster Management & Mitigation

Unit (DMMU)

2 Get agricultural land for PAP in designated agro-production areas (e.g. Matanda Resettlement Scheme) to secure their future. Min. of Agric; Dept. of Resettlement

(Office of the Vice President)

3 Offer financial support to PAP to continue with their businesses for income generation. Government/CEEC

4 Provide material support for agro-based activities e.g. vegetable, livestock/poultry production, (goats, chickens, ducks,

quails, rabbits, etc.).

Min. of Agric; NGOs

5 Offer preferential treatment to PAP under the Fertilizer Input Support Program (FISP) to ensure that PAP receive agro-inputs

for at least 3 years, then wean them off.

Min. of Agric; DMMU

3.5 Procedures for Redressing of Grievances

Grievance expression and management mechanism will utilize existing local structures and channels of communication; which starts from the

traditional institutional set up that uses the village structure of authority to channel grievances to local government. Any person or PAPs with an

issue regarding implementation of this ARAP, impacts of the Project from current or planned activities, asset data accuracy and team member

activities will launch their grievance(s) through their headman/woman who in turn will take it to the Director of Development Planning and the

Project Committee at MMC.10

In case the complainant is not satisfied with the proposed solution, the complainant has the right to pursue the case with the traditional Chief who

will then raise the grievance in full Council meetings through the Chief’s representative. Zambia Land Alliance or any other NGO preferred by

the PAP (e.g. Caritas Zambia, Women for Change, Civil Society for Poverty Reduction, etc.) will provide a watchdog oversight function to receive

grievances from PAPs that are unanswered by MMC or Government/CEEC and assist the complainant to have the issue resolved. Zambia Land

Alliance (ZLA) and Caritas Zambia have distinguished themselves as non-governmental organizations that respond quickly to grievances

concerning unfair land grabs affecting the poor, vulnerable and marginalized people. The Lands Tribunal has also been instrumental in resolving

many grievances for PAPs.

Media will also be involved and encouraged to expose unresolved grievances so that national coverage is made possible to force reluctant

officialdom to respond to grievances appropriately and effectively. It is prudent to involve the media in the grievance mechanism to be used in this

ARAP to ensure transparency and accountability by those involved in providing responses to the PAPs. Transparency and accountability is in line

with the Bank’s policy on information sharing, disclosures as well as its participatory principles.

3.6 Institutional Responsibilities for Implementing the ARAP, including involvement of NGOs in monitoring the ARAP

MMC is the lead institution in implementing this ARAP but will be supported by the CEEC and the Zambia Land Alliance (ZLA). Working closely

with His Royal Highness Chief Kalasa Lukangaba and other Chiefs surrounding Mansa town, MMC is also responsible for sourcing of alternative

land for resettling PAP as well as securing funds from Central Government to meet compensation costs according to agreements made with PAPs.

CEEC will be responsible for ensuring that the 25 households still resident on the project land receive adequate compensations before the cut-off

dates; and that women and youths who are among the PAPs receive priority in resettlement assistance. ZLA or any selected NGO will monitor

implementation of the ARAP. As agreed in the compensation package, Chiefs will provide land to PAPs and host them as part of the subjects that

require permanent habitats. Headmen/women and Chief’s advisors’ will ensure that all PAPs in their village registers are adequately compensated

according to their assets documented. Zambia National Marketers Association will be useful in helping PAPs find space for trading and offering

other services related to trade in the markets.

3.7 Schedule

Although a full Resettlement Action Plan (FRAP) was concluded earlier in 2015 between all the relevant authorities and the local communities,

CEEC considered it appropriate to develop an ARAP specifically to cater for the people on its project site, and specifically the remaining 25

households who currently reside on the Project land. A delay in their moving out of the land will affect the project starting date and therefore have

a direct bearing on the project timeframe. The ARAP is meant to highlight cost implications for relocation of PAPs as well as plan how that process

can be facilitated. Table 8 gives a proposed timeframe and schedule of activities for the ARAP. Ideally, it would be good if the remaining 25

households on the project land could all move out by the end of October 2015; this would enable the Zambian government plan for its project

implementation beginning of 2016. But more importantly moving out by October this year (2015) would allow PAPs to cultivate their fields for

the 2015/2016 farming season in the new area where they will relocate to and avoid deepening food insecurity at household level.

Table 8: Timeframe and Schedule of Activities for the Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan

ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTIVITIES DATES /

TIMEFRAME

1 Declaration of Luka Kapasha development area (as in Statutory Instrument No. 61 of 2013) 12 July 2013

2 Government Statutory Instrument No 61 of 2013 12 July 2013

3 Asset valuation and counting of households in Luka Kapasha Development Area, which includes Project land -(as in MMC RAP,

p.7)

2014

4 Adoption of the Resettlement Policy Framework by Mansa Municipal Council for the Luka Kapasha Development Area (as in RAP) 2014

5 Consultations with PAPs and counting of households specifically on Project land only as stakeholder engagement program (by

AfDB/CEEC Consultant)

6-7 August, 2015

6 Discussions with each project affected household on SEDP land regarding entitlements and resettlement options. 6-7 August 2015

7 Disclosure of ARAP for review and comment (30 days prior to Board presentation) 30 August, 2015

8 Finalization of the ARAP in light of comments received 30 September, 2015

9 Adoption of the ARAP by Mansa Municipal Council 15 October, 2015

10 ARAP implemented 30 October, 2015

11 MMC allocates residential plots to PAPs for construction of their home replacement Process to commence soon

12 Allocation of agricultural land for land compensation to PAPs by His Royal Highness Chief Kalasa Lukangaba Process to commence soon

10 See also MMC RAP, 2015:p8

6

13 Signing and execution of agreements with individual households, including delivery of all cash and in-kind compensation

entitlements

30 October, 2015

14 All PAPs move out of Project land 30 November, 2015

3.8 Budget Estimate for ARAP

Table 9 gives a summary of the ARAP Total Budget Estimate of Four million, one nineteen thousand and eight hundred ten Kwacha

(ZMW4,119,810.00) only. This Budget Estimate has two components: (i) A Resettlement Assistance amounting to Two million, Two Seventy-

seven thousand and Five hundred twenty Kwacha (ZMW2,277,520.00); and (ii) Compensation for displacement for One million, Eight forty-two

thousand and two hundred ninety Kwacha ( ZMW 1,842,290.00).

Table 9: ARAP Budget Estimate

No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QUANTITY UNIT

COST

(ZMW)

TOTAL

COST

(ZMW)

SOURCE

OF FUNDS

1 Start-up capital for small business per household for 27 PAP households11 1 27 10,000 270,000.00 GRZ

2 Fertilizer support for one lima of corn (maize); 4 bags D compound & 4 urea fertilizers @ K220

per 50 kg bag

8 27 220 47,520.00 GRZ

3 Cash transfer to 15 vulnerable women from 145 PAPs (elderly or HIV/AIDS patients) for 24

months

24 15 2,500 900,000.00 GRZ

4 Cash transfer to 16 vulnerable youths (OVCs) for 24 months 24 16 2,500 960,000.00 GRZ

5 Grant to Zambia Land Alliance (or other NGO) to monitor implementation of ARAP for one

year

1 1 100,000 100,000.00 GRZ

6 Survey diagrams, building plans and site maps from MMC as contribution in kind to PAPs 27 0 MMC

7 Sub-total 2,277,520.00

8 Brought forward from Compensation Schedule for PAPs in Chimpulumba & Chikuwe villages

on Project land

27 1,842,290.00

GRAND TOTAL 4,119,810.00

Resettlement assistance included considerations for livelihoods of PAPs in their new abodes. The Bank advocates for PAPs to enjoy a better life

in their new abode compared to the former. To do this, PAPs need to be engaged in social and economic activities that enhance their lives- and

this costs money. It is clear that MMC estimated a displacement disturbance value, but that did not go beyond providing a small allowance which

could not be deemed sustainable. The resettlement assistance in this ARAP includes providing startup capital for businesses. Some of the PAPs in

Chimpulumba and Chikuwe villages were already doing some IGA, which helped provide for their daily needs. But when they move, they will

need to develop new business sites and networks hence they require to be assisted in this respect. MMC and CEEC could tap into existing social

safety net systems that, for instance, provide support to farmers through agro-input programmes as well as social cash transfers to the poor and

vulnerable groups, which this ARAP suggests. This will assist PAPs to settle easily in the new areas of their choice.

4. CONCLUSION

This ARAP has been prepared for 27 households who are still living on a 10.8 ha of land allocated to the Project for the construction of an industrial

cluster under the Skills Development and Entrepreneurship Project (SDEP); this is out of a total of 166 households located in Luka Kapasha

development project of the MMC township boundary extension (3,150 ha. The project will be funded by the African Development Bank (AfDB).

Since the Project involves only a tiny fraction of Luka Kapasha area, it was deemed necessary to prepare an ARAP to cover only people on the

Project land. Preparation of this ARAP was guided by AfDB’s Operational Safeguard Policies that requires the borrower to develop a

comprehensive relocation action plan (RAP) if the number of people to be affected by a developmental activity is more than 200 or an abbreviated

relocation plan if the affected people are less than 200.

Inherently, an ARAP formulation prompts engagement in a consultative process with parties involved so that their entitlements are taken care of.

This ARAP is a result of a consultative process between stakeholders in Mansa District Council, the affected people currently located on the

Project land who will be involuntarily resettled, and host communities.

Discussions with MMC and assessment of secondary data revealed that MMC has offered four types of compensation to all the 620 people who

will be relocated from Luka Kapasha Development Area. The compensation package includes:








for this activity.

For the 27 households (145 people) from Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages who are still on the Project land, this assessment showed that some

of them have moved out to new areas as per compensation provision specified under iii) above. Those who have remained indicated that they

fear that if they move out, MMC will take it easy and will not be in a hurry to compensate them. Hence, they will wait to be compensated

in full before they can move out. Out of 145 people on the project land, 16 were identified as vulnerable youths and 15 women that would require

more support.

11 If this cannot be given free as part of the relocation package, consider giving it out as a soft loan at no interest to those people wishing to engage in such form of business that would cushion the impact of relocation.

7

The ARAP concludes as follows:

While houses, water wells and fruit trees were valued, including the addition of an inconvenience of displacement of the PAPs by the MMC, one

critical requirement of the Bank’s Operational Social Safeguard was not covered. The OSS2 emphasizes better livelihoods for displaced people as

a key component of their involuntary resettlement. In the new settlement, PAPs are supposed to enjoy better livelihoods compared to their former

place of residence before displacement. This ARAP has factored in fertilizer support to PAPs and a business startup capital of K10,000.00 per

household. This will assist PAPs in their farming activities for the 2015/2016 season and also continue with or start a business for income

generation. The two grants will be sourced from GRZ-fertilizer support program under the Ministry of Agriculture and from the

Government/CEEC, respectively.

Compensation for 27 households is estimated to cost Four million, One nineteen thousand, Eight hundred and Ten Kwacha (ZMW

4,119,810.00) only. Furthermore, this ARAP provides a roadmap for the grievance mechanism which PAPs should use to get their issues resolved.

It proposes having Zambia Land Alliance, a Non-Governmental Organization with keen interest in equitable distribution of land as well as an

advocate for women and youths empowerment programs in Zambia, to help oversee implementation of the ARAP. PAPs are also free to select

their preferred NGO to oversee this process on their behalf.

Whatever compensation option is adopted, livelihood restoration is embedded in the ARAP as part of the Integrated Safeguards Systems (ISS),

which are central to the Bank’s international best practices standards that it unequivocally advocates. In this regard, sufficient provisions have

been made for PAPs to receive cash transfers from GRZ schemes to cushion their settling down for at least 3 years before they are weaned off.

8

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AfDB (2013). The African Development Bank’s Integrated Safeguard System _Policy Statement and Operational Safeguards, December 2013

AfDB(2012). The African Development Bank’s Integrated Safeguard System – Policy Statement and Operational Safeguards, 26 September 2012. Quality

Assurance and Results Department

Rose Makano (2015). Draft Environmental and social Impact Assessment Report (ESIA, 2015)

Mansa Municipal Council (2015). Relocation Action Plan for Luka Kapasha Development Area, Final Development Plan

9

APPENDICES

10

APPENDIX A: RESIDENTS AND SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION FOR 27* HOUSEHOLDS FROM CHIKUWE AND

CHIMPULUMBA VILLAGES IN LUKA KAPASHA DEVELOPMENT AREA, MANSA, LUAPULA

PROVINCE

S.N. OWNER’S NAME CONSTRUCTE

D

STRUCTURES

VALUE

FRUITS

VALUE

WATER

WELL/SEPTI

C SEWER

DISTURBANCE

ALLOWANCE

FOR

DISPLACEMEN

T

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

ALLOWANCE IN ZMK

GENERAL

CONSIDERATIO

N REMARKS

Chikuwe Village

1 Neety Mapulanga 3,700 900 500 1,000 6,100 Mud brick

2 Phillimon Chingamuka 29,600 2,900 500 6,600 39,600 Burnt brick

3 Patrick Mwila 28,100 1,300 500 6,000 35,900 Burnt brick

4 Mavis Chibwe Kweme 3,500 1,150 - 900 6,550 Mud house

5 Domitila M. Kapambwe 64,600 4,600 500 13,900 83,600 Burnt brick

6 Antoinette Kapambwe 5,200 900 - 1,200 7,300 Mud Brick

7 Edward L. Chola Meleka 161,800 2,800 1,500 33,200 199,300

Chimpulumba Village

1 Mary Mumba 43,500 670 - 8,800 52,970 Burnt brick

2 Agness Mumba 49,300 1,500 1,000 10,400 62,200

3 Paul Kapambwe 5,200 300 500 1,200 7,200 Mud brick

4 John Mwansa 4,800 2,150 - 1,400 8,350 Mud brick

5 Charity Mwansa 3,700 600 - 900 5,200 Mud brick

6 Jacquiline Ngandwe 3,500 450 - 800 4,750 Mud brick

7 Violet Mwansa 3,500 2,800 - 1,300 7,600 Mud brick

8 Enes Palangwa 13,500 4,000 - 3,500 21,000 Mud brick

9 John chisenga 2,200 2,100 - 600 5,200 Mud brick

10 Rachael Chama 5,200 8,800 500 2,300 17,400 Burnt brick

11 Josephine Saka 6,300 4,500 500 1,100 13,600 Mud brick

12 Prisca Katebe 3,500 300 - 700 4,600 Mud brick

13 Bupe Mukobe 3,000 1,050 500 700 5,450 Mud brick

14 Chola Chilufya 2,800 600 - 600 4,100 Mud brick

15 John Kafula 2,600 1,850 - 900 3,600 Mud brick

16 Joseph Mumba 5,200 4,200 - 2,000 11,900 Mud brick

Total 454,300 50420 6500 100,000 613,470

NB*: These 23 names were captured by MMC in 2014. A recent count by the Consultant found 27 households, of which 2 have moved out. The difference can be attributed

to two things: i) some residents have rented property and those occupants were not counted as owners of the property, therefore, not entitled to compensation; ii) some people

may have moved into the area to join their relatives, or current residents build rental property after MMC’s estate count and valuation.

11

APPENDIX B: TOTAL NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS FROM CHIKUWE AND CHIMPULUMBA VILLAGES,12

LUKA KAPASHA DEVELOPMENT AREA, MANSA, LUAPULA PROVINCE

This table shows the total number of residents in Chikuwe and Chimpulumba villages, counted by MMC in 2014. It includes the ones reported

in Annex A above, who are on the project site. This information has been included to give a complete picture about the two villages mentioned in

this ARAP.

S.N OWNER’S NAME CONSTRUCTE

D

STRUCTURES

VALUE

FRUITS

VALUE

WATER

WELL/SEPTI

C SEWER

DISTURBANCE

ALLOWANCE

FOR

DISPLACEMEN

T

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

ALLOWANCE IN ZMK

GENERAL

CONSIDERATIO

N REMARKS

1 Rosemary Bupe Milambo 32,400 1,550 - 6,800 40,750 Burnt brick

2 Sara Milambo 10,500 1,350 500 2,500 14,850 Mud brick

3 Philip Mwaka 30,900 1,400 3,500 7,200 43,000 Burnt brick

4 Anne Milambo 25,900 300 - 5,200 31,400 Burnt brick

5 Fred Kafwanka 53,100 - - 10,600 63,700 Concrete block

6 Mwansa Mulubwa 30,500 - - 6,100 36,600 Burnt brick

7 Suzan Chama 66,300 2,500 500 13,900 83,200 Burnt brick

8 Justin Mumba 5,080 200 - 1,100 6,380 Mud brick

9 Nelly Mumba 5,500 200 500 1,600 9,600 Mud brick

10 Elin Chilufya Luswili 6,300 3,700 500 2,100 12,600 Mud brick

11 Steven Chisenga 2,600 3,550 500 1,300 7,950 Mud brick

12 Muluka Kunda 23,800 4,400 500 5,700 34,400 Burnt brick

13 Bupe C. Kasongo 7,600 2,650 500 2,150 12,900 Mud brick

14 Benjamin Chama 2,100 450 - 500 3,050 Mud brick

15 Eunice Motoka 27,900 6,100 500 6,900 41,400 Burnt brick

16 Lombe Sapwe 14,600 - - 2,900 17,500 Mud brick

17 Oliver Sibukale 2,900 - - 600 3,500 Mud brick

18 Albina Simalumba 1,600 500 500 3,400 20,400 Burnt brick

19 Nyambe Muwana 1,700 650 - 500 2,850 Mud brick

20 Christine Ngandu 32,400 1,870 500 6,900 41,670 Burnt brick

21 Mr. Chipulu 5,900 300 - 1,200 7,400 Burnt brick

22 Doris Mutama 9,900 900 - 2,800 17,100 Mud brick

23 Mathias Mutama 5,000 2,600 500 1,600 9,700 Mud brick

24 Jameson Mpundu 11,600 2,100 - 2,700 16,400 Mud brick

25 Obvious Bwalya 43,700 9,100 1,000 10,800 64,600 Mud brick

26 Benson Kandanta 10,500 6,000 500 3,400 20,400 Mud brick

27 Dilis Musonda Mulenga 2,600 2,700 - 2,300 13,600 Mud brick

28 Patrick Mwansa 24,200 5,000 500 5,900 35,600 Burnt brick

29 Neety Mapulanga 3,700 900 500 1,000 6,100 Mud brick

30 Phillimon Chingamuka 29,600 2,900 500 6,600 39,600 Burnt brick

31 Patrick Mwila 28,100 1,300 500 6,000 35,900 Burnt brick

12 Includes the 27 households resident on the project site. The rest of the 58 households are outside the project land.

12


D

STRUCTURES

VALUE

FRUITS

VALUE

WATER

WELL/SEPTI

C SEWER

DISTURBANCE

ALLOWANCE

FOR

DISPLACEMEN

T

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

ALLOWANCE IN ZMK

GENERAL

CONSIDERATIO

N REMARKS

32 Mavis Chibwe Kweme 3,500 1,150 - 900 6,550 Mud house

33 Domitila M. Kapambwe 64,600 4,600 500 13,900 83,600 Burnt brick

34 Antoinette Kapambwe 5,200 900 - 1,200 7,300 Mud Brick

35 Edward L. Chola Meleka 161,800 2,800 1,500 33,200 199,300

36 Philip Mwaka 44,800 - - 900 53,800 Burnt brick

37 Phoeby M. Kabangwe 30,500 850 500 6,400 38,250 Burnt brick

38 Patson Mwewa 3,700 1,600 - 1,100 6,400 Mud brick

39 Emmanuel Kachingwe 18,600 300 - 3,800 22,700 Burnt brick

40 Felix Chilemya 45,700 - 500 9,200 55,400 Burnt brick

41 Grace Mulubwa 4,700 - - 900 5,600 Mud brick

42 Ignatius Mumba 2,720 500 4,500 1,500 9,220 Burnt brick

43 Beatrice Longwani 2,200 600 - 600 3,400 Mud brick

44 Isaac Kalaba 4,000 2,200 - 1,200 7,400 Mud brick

45 Reuben Chilufya 11,800 - - 2,400 14,200 Burnt brick

46 Mary Mumba 43,500 670 - 8,800 52,970 Burnt brick

47 Agness Mumba 49,300 1,500 1,000 10,400 62,200

48 Paul Kapambwe 5,200 300 500 1,200 7,200 Mud brick

49 John Mwansa 4,800 2,150 - 1,400 8,350 Mud brick

50 Charity Mwansa 3,700 600 - 900 5,200 Mud brick

51 Jacquiline Ngandwe 3,500 450 - 800 4,750 Mud brick

52 Violet Mwansa 3,500 2,800 - 1,300 7,600 Mud brick

53 Enes Palangwa 13,500 4,000 - 3,500 21,000 Mud brick

54 John chisenga 2,200 2,100 - 600 5,200 Mud brick

55 Paul Mwewa 2,400 750 - 2,900 3,750 Mud brick

56 Rachael Chama 5,200 8,800 500 2,300 17,400 Burnt brick

57 Josephine Saka 6,300 4,500 500 1,100 13,600 Mud brick

58 Christine B. Mwandu 2,300 2,550 500 800 6,450 Mud brick

59 Prisca Katebe 3,500 300 - 700 4,600 Mud brick

60 Chama 3,500 - - 900 4,200 Mud brick

61 Bupe Mukobe 3,000 1,050 500 700 5,450 Mud brick

62 Chola Chilufya 2,800 600 - 600 4,100 Mud brick

63 John Kafula 2,600 1,850 - 900 3,600 Mud brick

64 Joseph Mumba 5,200 4,200 - 2,000 11,900 Mud brick

65 Margaret Chishimba 4,870 500 500 1,100 6,500 Mud brick

66 New Apostolic Church 56,700 - - 11,300 68,000

67 Ruth Nkandu 4,700 1,600 - 1,300 7,600 Mud brick

68 Peter Ackson Kunda 2,200 900 - 600 3,700 Mud brick

13


D

STRUCTURES

VALUE

FRUITS

VALUE

WATER

WELL/SEPTI

C SEWER

DISTURBANCE

ALLOWANCE

FOR

DISPLACEMEN

T

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

ALLOWANCE IN ZMK

GENERAL

CONSIDERATIO

N REMARKS

69 Rosalia Nkandu 4,000 2,200 - 1,200 7,400 Mud brick

70 Ruth Mwansa 6,400 3,200 - 2,000 12,100 Mud brick

71 Kennedy Chalwe 3,600 - 500 800 4,900 Mud brick

72 Edmond K.Chishala 5,700 2,000 500 1,600 9,800 Mud brick

73 Reuben Mwelwa Sempela 4,000 2,200 500 1,200 7,400 Mud brick

74 Wallace Mushanga 3,800 1,850 - 1,200 7,350 Mud brick

75 Patrick Chomba 1,600 800 500 500 2,900 Mud brick

76 Lazarous Mwila 3,900 600 - 900 5,400 Mud brick

77 Mable Mapulanga 3,500 400 - 800 4,700 Mud brick

78 Suzan Isaac 8,700 7,200 - 3,400 19,800 Mud brick

79 Regina Kasongo 3,700 900 500 900 5,500 Mud brick

80 Elizabeth chimpulumba 3,000 350 - 1,700 4,050 Mud brick

81 Rodrick Nkandu 58,300 700 - 12,500 75,000 Mud brick

82 Justina Mupeta 3,600 1,850 3,500 1,200 7,150 Mud brick

83 Night Kaonde 2,300 2,600 500 1,100 6,500 Mud brick

84 Evelyn Kasongo 5,900 2,600 - 1,700 10,200 Burnt brick

85 Felistus Mwewa 6,200 1,300 500 1,600 9,600 Burnt brick

1,324,970 153,590 31,000 299,850 1,842,290

abbreviated resettlement action plan (arap)...20 august 2015 postnet e835 box 97, kabulonga lusaka,...

Documents